Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

This unofficial St Kilda Saints fan forum is for people of all ages and all posts must be respectful.

Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators

Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby SMS » Thu 06 Jul 2017 9:57pm

Rocky 800k FA 3 years
Lever $1m 2017 First 5 years
Whitfield $750k 2017 First 4 years
Kelly $1.2m 2018 First 5 years

----
Flag would be ours in 2018 as Reiwoldt continues for some games, Freemand and Goddard get back and the growth of all the young guns.

WHY NOT? We can afford it. We have the picks. Afl want and need us to win a flag. Well this is the way.

WHY NOT??
SMS
Club Player
 
Posts: 862
Joined: Fri 04 Nov 2011 3:00pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby SMS » Thu 06 Jul 2017 10:00pm

GWS can have Hickey and Lonie too. Lol theyre good and whatvGWS need. Any chance?
SMS
Club Player
 
Posts: 862
Joined: Fri 04 Nov 2011 3:00pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby ausfatcat » Thu 06 Jul 2017 10:06pm

SMS wrote:WHY NOT? We can afford it. We have the picks. Afl want and need us to win a flag. Well this is the way.

WHY NOT??


Because we don't have 5 first round picks to get that lot
User avatar
ausfatcat
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 5921
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:36pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby Con Gorozidis » Thu 06 Jul 2017 10:25pm

1.We would need four top ten picks.
We only have one.

2. Why would any of them want to play for us?
User avatar
Con Gorozidis
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 22510
Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby magnifisaint » Thu 06 Jul 2017 10:38pm

Con Gorozidis wrote:1.We would need four top ten picks.
We only have one.

2. Why would any of them want to play for us?

cos we all barrack for the Saints that's why!

Good enough for us then it's good enough for them
User avatar
magnifisaint
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 5287
Joined: Sun 02 May 2004 2:52am
Location: Fiddling under my raincoat

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby kazonte13 » Thu 06 Jul 2017 10:41pm

Throw in Dusty and its a deal .
kazonte13
Club Player
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed 15 Feb 2012 12:51am

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby Ellaandjohn » Thu 06 Jul 2017 11:04pm

Wowee


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ellaandjohn
Club Player
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon 22 May 2017 11:02pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby SMS » Thu 06 Jul 2017 11:06pm

Wtf? Why not? FA for rocky we dont need a pick.

Id rather whitfield cheaper than kelly
SMS
Club Player
 
Posts: 862
Joined: Fri 04 Nov 2011 3:00pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby Proph3t of egan » Thu 06 Jul 2017 11:32pm

Wouldn't pay Lever more than 400k a year, most overrated youngster going around. We've got Carlisle to play that role, and about 3 others developing for it as well. Lever hasn't shown he can play in any other position other than as a loose tall in the backline, Carlisle can play Ruck and forward as well as backmen.

I'm open to Whitfield though, he's like if we mixed Newnes athleticism and hard work, with Sinclair class and poise
Fortius quo Fidelius means Strength through Loyalty. . . I think
Proph3t of egan
Club Player
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun 08 May 2016 8:02pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby SMS » Fri 07 Jul 2017 2:20am

3!others?? Godsard and?
SMS
Club Player
 
Posts: 862
Joined: Fri 04 Nov 2011 3:00pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby Proph3t of egan » Fri 07 Jul 2017 8:27am

SMS wrote:3!others?? Godsard and?

Marshall can play there, Coughlan, and Joyce are all developing talls.
Fortius quo Fidelius means Strength through Loyalty. . . I think
Proph3t of egan
Club Player
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun 08 May 2016 8:02pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby saintspremiers » Fri 07 Jul 2017 9:43am

SMS wrote:3!others?? Godsard and?


Forget about Goddard. Hasn't been on the park for 2 years pretty much come 2018 and when last played AFL was terribly slow
i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
saintspremiers
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 23454
Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
Location: Trump Tower

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby magnifisaint » Fri 07 Jul 2017 9:54am

Whitfield resigned with GWS earlier in the year. He is off the table!
User avatar
magnifisaint
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 5287
Joined: Sun 02 May 2004 2:52am
Location: Fiddling under my raincoat

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby aaron82 » Fri 07 Jul 2017 10:23am

Whitfield is an interesting prospect. I'd be most keen on him coming to the club.
We wouldn't need to sell the farm to get him, he grew up on the peninsula so he is local and he is apparently mates with a few on our list.

Whilst being signed up to GWS for 2018 he wouldn't be the first player to want out mid way through a contract. Whether GWS would Cam McCarthy him is another question.
He may come up in trade discussions later in the year. GWS are always very active in this period.
and that's the bottom line
aaron82
Club Player
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri 16 Sep 2011 2:03pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby St Chris » Fri 07 Jul 2017 10:42am

SMS wrote:Rocky 800k FA 3 years
Lever $1m 2017 First 5 years
Whitfield $750k 2017 First 4 years
Kelly $1.2m 2018 First 5 years



Rocky FA - Easy, tick, would want more than $800k though. Lions wouldn't match, AFL would give them Band 1 compo for sure.
Lever - Pick 14, 3rd defender type, hasn't put a foot wrong, 21 Y.O, wanted by every Victorian club. Swap for Saints 2017 pick (8-12 ish) & steak knives (depth player or later pick)
Whitfield - Pick 1, Contracted, solid mid without dominating, wants out but if GWS are losing Kelly, they can bump his salary to change his mind. Would need a mid first and 2nd to get the deal done, maybe Saints 2018 pick & 2nd rounder from trading Hickey
Kelly - Pick 2, gun mid, every club in the comp would want him, high profile move will bump up the cost, bidding war will get played out (like Treloar), would need 2 top 10 picks to get it done, Hawks 2017 pick is one, but where does the other come from?? Would we do it if we had to trade out Paddy??

Can't fault your ambition, but I can't see us pulling all of these together. I reckon if we can pull off 2 of these, we should be over the moon, and would instantly be stronger come 2018.
User avatar
St Chris
Club Player
 
Posts: 1948
Joined: Wed 05 Apr 2006 2:20pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby st.byron » Fri 07 Jul 2017 11:54am

magnifisaint wrote:Whitfield resigned with GWS earlier in the year. He is off the table!



Think that's not correct. There was talk of re-signing. I read it at the time of normal manager's straight bat answer to reporter's questions. Haven't seen any confirmation that Whitfield has re-signed at this point.
User avatar
st.byron
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005 7:04pm
Location: Mullum

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby St Chris » Fri 07 Jul 2017 12:29pm

st.byron wrote:
magnifisaint wrote:Whitfield resigned with GWS earlier in the year. He is off the table!



Think that's not correct. There was talk of re-signing. I read it at the time of normal manager's straight bat answer to reporter's questions. Haven't seen any confirmation that Whitfield has re-signed at this point.


His last signature was mid 2016, signed until the end of 2018.
User avatar
St Chris
Club Player
 
Posts: 1948
Joined: Wed 05 Apr 2006 2:20pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby meher baba » Fri 07 Jul 2017 4:27pm

Gee, talk about taking optimism to absurd levels.

The way these things usually work out, we'll do very well to snare even one of these four, or Martin instead. All indications are that Kelly is our number one target. I don't reckon we we would want Rockliff, or need Lever. And, as others have pointed out, Whitfield is under contract for another year.

The problem with Kelly is that clubs which believe that they are further away from a serious shot at a premiership (eg, North Melbourne and perhaps Carlton) might be prepared to pay even more for him than us. Whereas Martin, although still comparatively young, would fit neatly into our likely bid for glory in the 2018-2021 period: I'm talking, of course, in the comparatively unlikely event that he wants to leave the Tigers.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
User avatar
meher baba
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 5729
Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
Location: Tasmania

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby Con Gorozidis » Fri 07 Jul 2017 5:07pm

I would throw a lot at Whitfield.
User avatar
Con Gorozidis
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 22510
Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby magnifisaint » Sat 08 Jul 2017 3:14am

Con Gorozidis wrote:I would throw a lot at Whitfield.

I haven't seen him dominate a game.
User avatar
magnifisaint
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 5287
Joined: Sun 02 May 2004 2:52am
Location: Fiddling under my raincoat

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby Devilhead » Sat 08 Jul 2017 3:58am

Question is ..... could we nab both Kelly and Martin with our fat war chest?
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
User avatar
Devilhead
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 4543
Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby meher baba » Sat 08 Jul 2017 7:27am

Devilhead wrote:Question is ..... could we nab both Kelly and Martin with our fat war chest?


Even if we could (surely unlikely), we shouldn't IMO. Our priorities, in order, should be.

1. Sign a genuine star (Kelly is the best option I reckon).

2. Throw some of our extra $$$ at our existing list, rewarding those who've come on really well.

3. If there's any left over, grab some good established talent to fill gaps.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
User avatar
meher baba
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 5729
Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
Location: Tasmania

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby saintsRrising » Sat 08 Jul 2017 12:32pm

meher baba wrote:
Devilhead wrote:Question is ..... could we nab both Kelly and Martin with our fat war chest?


Even if we could (surely unlikely), we shouldn't IMO. Our priorities, in order, should be.

1. Sign a genuine star (Kelly is the best option I reckon).

2. Throw some of our extra $$$ at our existing list, rewarding those who've come on really well.

3. If there's any left over, grab some good established talent to fill gaps.


Sorry but 2. and 3. is how GT f****** up a tilt at a flag or two. We paid too much too our young emerging stars, and players like Ball gave us no loyalty once the largess for being overpaid for results delivered finished. Overpaying that group of players prevented us from bringing in topline talent when we needed to most. Many rail against the Saints topping up with older players, GOPs and players who had not made it at their past club instead of a star or two, but the sad reality is that those inflated contracts meant that we could not do so.

So the Saints MUST not repeat that mistake.

Our list management team need to not now fritter away the war-chest we have built up. Yes those on the rise get more, but only fairly so. But we cannot not throw $$$ at who we have.
You look at the Cats and the Hawks and both of these team through their recent great eras are characterised by not paying $$$ to the few.

So it CANNOT be a case of "if there's any left over", but that there MUST be cash left over. If the Saints need a player like a Jolly, or an Ottens, in 2-4 years to complete our team we must be in the position to get that player.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
User avatar
saintsRrising
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 26530
Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
Location: Off to St Kilda Scotland in 2018

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby meher baba » Sat 08 Jul 2017 12:47pm

saintsRrising wrote:
meher baba wrote:
Devilhead wrote:Question is ..... could we nab both Kelly and Martin with our fat war chest?


Even if we could (surely unlikely), we shouldn't IMO. Our priorities, in order, should be.

1. Sign a genuine star (Kelly is the best option I reckon).

2. Throw some of our extra $$$ at our existing list, rewarding those who've come on really well.

3. If there's any left over, grab some good established talent to fill gaps.


Sorry but 2. and 3. is how GT f****** up a tilt at a flag or two. We paid too much too our young emerging stars, and players like Ball gave us no loyalty once the largess for being overpaid for results delivered finished. Overpaying that group of players prevented us from bringing in topline talent when we needed to most. Many rail against the Saints topping up with older players, GOPs and players who had not made it at their past club instead of a star or two, but the sad reality is that those inflated contracts meant that we could not do so.

So the Saints MUST not repeat that mistake.

Our list management team need to not now fritter away the war-chest we have built up. Yes those on the rise get more, but only fairly so. But we cannot not throw $$$ at who we have.
You look at the Cats and the Hawks and both of these team through their recent great eras are characterised by not paying $$$ to the few.

So it CANNOT be a case of "if there's any left over", but that there MUST be cash left over. If the Saints need a player like a Jolly, or an Ottens, in 2-4 years to complete our team we must be in the position to get that player.


I can't agree with you. It was the right thing to do to secure all our stars in the mid-2000s. Ball didn't stay past the end of his contract, but are you seriously suggesting that was mainly due to money? But we were able to retain the core of a team that finished in the top four in 2004, 2005, 2008, 2009 and 2010 and should have been in the top four in 2006 bar the AFL robbing us of 2 points! It was good list management, on the whole (there was the small matter of Lovett...)

What is bad list management is throwing a huge amount of money at a couple of stars, and not having enough to keep rewarding your core as they improve. That's what we'd end up doing if we try to sign two or more superstars for next year. One is enough.

And "topping up" is quite ok if you pick well. St Kilda is currrently a bit like a team built from "top ups": Membrey, Bruce, Steele, Weller, Stevens, Hickey, Longer, Roberton, Brown, Savage and Carlisle (although Jake is arguably a minor star). And we go ok, don't we? I also wouldn't mind if we spend our kitty on getting some more of the same. In my book, a Kelly or a Martin is a "nice to have", rather than drop dead essential. And that has to be the case, because we might not snare one: and that shouldn't be grounds for slashing our wrists.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
User avatar
meher baba
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 5729
Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
Location: Tasmania

Re: Why not Rocky, Lever, Kelly and Whitfield?

Postby Scollop » Sat 08 Jul 2017 1:38pm

saintsRrising wrote:
meher baba wrote:
Even if we could (surely unlikely), we shouldn't IMO. Our priorities, in order, should be.

1. Sign a genuine star (Kelly is the best option I reckon).

2. Throw some of our extra $$$ at our existing list, rewarding those who've come on really well.

3. If there's any left over, grab some good established talent to fill gaps.


Sorry but 2. and 3. is how GT f****** up a tilt at a flag or two. We paid too much too our young emerging stars, and players like Ball gave us no loyalty once the largess for being overpaid for results delivered finished.


I was of the view that GT helped create the foundations for success and the blueprint for a team culture including the loyalty of the list (who included most of the leaders within the core playing group). I believe that RL was the main reason the loyalty dissolved.

Without the loyalty and belief created by GT the team wouldn't have got that close under RL imo, but it's all hypothetical. I reckon GT would have got the job done if he was given a chance. But history will say he failed as did RL. Only difference is that GT wasn't given the opportunity to see the fruits of the maturity of the group. RL had the core group in their prime.

If you want to be like a politician and blame GT because RL failed as a coach that's your business.
Con Gorozidis wrote:If I have to explain how that works then dont reply because you are too dense to converse with.
Scollop
SS Hall of Fame
 
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sun 11 Sep 2011 2:26pm

Next

Return to Saintsational Fan Forum (open to all ages)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Con Gorozidis, diddley, DJ Higgins, fugazi, Google [Bot], jaxons, santazzi, skeptic, The Barometer and 27 guests